{ Copywriter Mom }

Saturday, October 25, 2008

I love Carter's baby clothes. There's a Carter's store not too far from us, and it's almost as fun shopping for my daughter's clothes there as it is going shopping for myself.

If you have any of the tagless clothing from their fall line last year, though, you may want to keep an eye out for this (note: per the article, this does not apply to their current lines). From Forbes:

"The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and children's-clothes maker Carters Inc. said Friday that some of its clothes with "tagless" labels have given children and infants a rash.

The tagless clothes are part of Carter's fall 2007 product line that uses a label on the inside back of the garment that has a raised surface and solid, rather than stenciled, background.

A small percentage of babies and infants have developed rashes on the upper back after wearing the clothing, the company and the government agency said."

Friday, October 24, 2008

For months, my daughter would throw a fit if we tried to put her to bed and leave the room before she fell asleep. We tried to let her "cry it out" on numerous occasions, but she outlasted us every time.

And, she has some pretty powerful lungs.

Eventually, I gave in and decided it was easier to sit in the rocking chair next to her with my laptop and work while she drifted off to sleep. Of course, this became part of her bedtime routine, so that when we walked in to her room each night, she'd say "'puter," for my computer.

About a month and a half ago, though, we decided to put her to bed by herself again. The first night, she was so tired that she went straight to sleep. The second night, she protested by crying for about 5 minutes, and then fell asleep. The third night, she whined a bit, but didn't put up a fight. For the rest of that week and ever since, she's been tucked in with her stuffed animals, her blanket, and a kiss goodnight.

I hadn't considered how much things have changed until I put her to bed just now. She asked for a specific teddy bear, which I gave her. When I leaned over her bed, she pulled my face close, gave me a kiss, said "love you mommy," and then said "tose it," which, in her baby-speak, means "close it."

Sunday, September 14, 2008

As I'm sitting here checking email, she saunters over to the couch and says, in her cutest, almost-2-year old voice, "snuggles." Which, of course, means that she wants to climb up on my lap to give me a big hug and take over the spot currently occupied by my computer.

With her big grin and arms outstretched, eyes peeking out from beneath her messy hair, I can't resist. She obviously knows how to distract me from the task at hand.

I used to be a huge fan of SNL but I rarely watch it anymore. I had to tune in last night, though, for Tina Fey's return to the show.

She made an appearance as Sara Palin alongside Amy Poehler's Hillary Clinton. Although the rest of the show left something to be desired, the opening skit was spot-on. I only saw the first part initially, but when I got to watch the whole skit on YouTube I cracked up. (It's still available on the SNL website if you haven't seen it.)

Speaking of YouTube, if you're up for another parody of Palin, check out this one by YouTube user and actress LisaNova. It's definitely more critical, but it's still a great laugh based on the impression alone.

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Yes, I'm glad there's a female candidate for VP. And, I understand her qualifications as a governor. But Vice President? Really?

(Have to add one more political aside, and then I'll try to get back to my normal marcom and motherhood rants.)

I just finished watching part 1 of Charlie Gibson's interview with Sarah Palin, and it made me cringe.

If you haven't seen it, watch it now. Then, come back and tell me it's not awful.

Palin talked about having to be "wired in such a way...you can't blink." Yet, she clearly doesn't have the knowledge of domestic or foreign policy that ANY other candidate for president or VP has had.

Being committed and wired to react doesn't make a difference without the knowledge or the context required to make critical decisions.

Aside from the fact that she doesn't have the knowledge, she also doesn't have the confidence we need at the president's side. For all of the press she's gotten for being cocky -- or at least overly confident -- she's visibly out of her comfort zone now, and could well be eaten alive by some of the more critical opponents out there.

I can't imagine her being taken seriously in a meeting with Putin or another head of state -- not because she's a woman (although this is already a strike against her for many), but because she seems so out of her league.

Watching her speak reminded me of a PR executive I worked for, who held the top communications job at a F500 company, but had no understanding of pop culture, trends, or consumer interests. Talking to her about a tie-in to a current TV show or fad would elicit a blank stare, because she didn't follow "that stuff." Eventually, of course, there were too many blank stares for her to continue doing her job.

That's how I see Sarah Palin. There's a reason ABC showed different camera angles when Gibson questioned her about the Bush doctrine: they didn't want to show the initial look on her face.

Am I wrong?

###

Update: Dan Froomkin at the Post has an interesting article today (What is the Bush Doctrine Anyway?) that explains a nuance even Gibson didn't seem to catch. I didn't know the difference, but then, I'm not campaigning for the Vice Presidency of the United States. :)